[OT] open-source license issues

[spir]

On 04/12/2011 12:24 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Russel Winder"<russel at russel.org.uk>  wrote in message
> news:mailman.3416.1302591172.4748.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
>>
>> Personally I find licences such as BSD, MIT, ASL, etc. ones to avoid
>> since they allow organizations to take software, sell it for profit and
>> return absolutely nothing to the development community.
>
> I've never seen that as a realistic concern. Here's the basic scenario:
>
> 1. I make program Foo and release it under BSD/MIT/etc.
>
> 2. The company EvilSoftwareCo takes Foo and sells it giving me nothing.
>
> That's what's seen as the problem, right? I'm not concerned because the
> obvious next steps are:
>
> 3. I go around spreading the fact that EvilSoftwareCo's Foo is available for
> free (both meanings of the term) from my site.
>
> 4. There isn't a fucking thing EvilSoftwareCo can do about it.
>
> "But what if EvilSoftwareCo makes proprietary changes to Foo and sells it as
> FooPlus? Your Foo doesn't get any of those extras!"
>
> Don't care. If they put in the time and effort to add value to something,
> then they *should* be allowed to ask for compensation for their work under
> whatever business model they choose. And if the value they've added is
> merely trivial, then A. My version of Foo can still compete and B. I can
> just add it to my Foo myself (or anyone else can).

That's true. And I'm all for EvilSoftwareCo to get money for *their* work; 
rather than for theirs *and* yours ;-) (where 'you' may also be a whole 
community -- that would not even have the opportunity to reuse EvilSoftwareCo's 
advances)
Just like I'm all for music editors to get money for their work: edition, or 
rather distribution. But in reality, they used to get a de facto tax on 
listening to music (via copyright).

Denis
-- 
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com